A Simple Timeline Proves the Early Church was Catholic

[tqualey]

Hi, Brb3,

Thanks!

God bless

Google [EARLY DATING OF REVELATION] ---- for full list of sources.

But, two recent books that summarize the crucial historical data are :

RAPTURE, by David B. Currie [2003]
BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL - DATING THE BOOK OF REVELATION, by Kenneth L. Gentry [1998]

I’ve loaned my 2 books above to Protestants … and they are blown away with the prophetic meaning of all Biblical books of prophesy [Revelation, Daniel, Zephaniah, Matthew, etc]… and also the history that supports the dating of John’s writings.

Currie’s book establishes the late dating of Rev. is poorly supported and is ripe with error. Any Pre-Trib Protestant will give up their indoctrinations after reading RAPTURE, by Currie.

 

[Arandur]

Sometime when you are feeling very honest about learning your spiritual family history, I urge you to attend a synagogue service. I was amazed at how the Divine Liturgy follows the pattern precisely, with the inclusion of the Eucharist. …The Apostles always went to the synagogues first, and they continued to worship in the synagogues on Sabbath until they were ejected from them around the time the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. We can already read in the book of Acts how the Christians were thrown out of the synagogues. They simply had their own service, and followed the same liturgy that they had used all their lives. When the faith was taken to the Gentiles, this same pattern was followed.

Guanophore, could you direct me to any resources that would show the synagogue service’s ritual patterns, particularly ancient ones?

I have long known that the Divine Liturgy followed the pattern, but have never been able to see it for myself. I’d love to make the comparison.

Thanks!

 

[seamusmohr]

Even a caveman can see it! (I have been watching entirely too much television.)

The point is, whilst very few doubt the early church being catholic, what needs doing is explaining the place or position of the Roman Catholic Church!

 

[paul_c]

The point is, whilst very few doubt the early church being catholic, what needs doing is explaining the place or position of the Roman Catholic Church!

What do you think needs explaining. The Catholic Church was centered in Rome from the days of St. Peter.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Amazing that those of whatever faith just “drop in”. “Attack” a sacred religion which is followed in every single country in the world today. And rightfully so. And the nature of the game is to find a fault, any fault, just One will do. To invalidate an entire belief?

And this becomes masked in a few different way’s

1. Through a self proclaimed interpretation of what “they” believe to be “Truth of Religion”.

2, Masked in intellect which is wrongly assumed no-one else here can understand or follow.

1. Or, is in effect a behavior issue, with a lack of abilty to come to terms with one’s own feelings of fustration and confusion of understanding, which becomes anger and contemp. Then whats most baffling its proclaimed as a lack of understanding by Catholics?

Wow, and you know what, so many of these thread-topics come back around to the same issues, that its actually a challenge to keep up with them. Then when the actual topic becomes exhasted. “which this one obviously has” Then new challenge arrives at the end of the post to start the next? …predictable,

Yet at the same time its Sad, because its really a War for Souls. Well you know, should we save one, Just ONE! It would all be worth it.

 

[Memaw]

The point is, whilst very few doubt the early church being catholic, what needs doing is explaining the place or position of the Roman Catholic Church!

It is God’s Will that the Catholic Church,( Pope, Vatican etc), is located in Rome. Catholic means universal, not Roman. Where ever the Pope is there is the Catholic Church. He is the one that is infallible in teaching what Christ taught, along with the Bishops in union with him. As long as they ARE in union with him. I recommend reading the 3 volume books by William Jurgens, titled “The Faith of the Early Fathers.” God Bless, Memaw

 

[JustaServant]

There is very good evidence that Revelation came first … probably in 66-67 AD, then John wrote his Gospel in late 70’s / 80’s, finally he wrote his 3 letters just prior to his death … in early/mid 90’s.

MMMMmmmnnnnot really. One obscure referance to the Apostles taught “until Nero” would get thrown out of any courtroom. It is tempting I agree because then all could agree Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem. Other ECFs say Revelation was written in the 90s.
Nevertheless, it is still within the 100 year timeline.

 

[brb3]

MMMMmmmnnnnot really. One obscure referance to the Apostles taught “until Nero” would get thrown out of any courtroom. It is tempting I agree because then all could agree Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem. Other ECFs say Revelation was written in the 90s.
Nevertheless, it is still within the 100 year timeline.

The External evidence is only via Irenaeus … and it is fraught with problems.

The Internal evidence is overwhelmingly supportive of the early date. Many ECF’s didn’t buy into Irenaeus’s date and those closer to John’s locale, supported the early date.

While it is possible John was persecuted twice, once during reign of Nero and later under Domitian … his Revelation was written during the early pre-70 AD time period. Much has been written, revealed on this matter — since your doctoral training.

 

[seamusmohr]

What do you think needs explaining. The Catholic Church was centered in Rome from the days of St. Peter.

That is not so! It was centered in the East, around the Roman Empire! It was because of the Monarchial, or political affiliations that Roman Church grew, the same reasons gave Constantinople its base . The Bishop of Rome was made Patriarch of the West, because he was Bishop of Old Rome, whilst Constantinople was made Patriarch of the East, because he was Bishop of New Rome! There you have it, a political title, nothing divine or apostolic about it. The Bishop of Rome was, in the early Church, a servant of the state and his Bishopric a Dept, of the same! All titles, to both Patriarchs were given by the Church, through the Ecumenical Councils and were of Honour and Place!

Of the timeline .little needs to be said in my opinion. The point at issue is that the the Church in Rome, in the early centuries was not ,‘The,’ Catholic Church. It was as one member nearly said, the Suburbicarian Church of Italy or Rome, with the City Bishop at the head. It existed from Rome down to the Toe and encompassed by three Islands! It was a Particular Church, or Communion within the Catholic Church.

 

[seamusmohr]

It is God’s Will that the Catholic Church,( Pope, Vatican etc), is located in Rome. Catholic means universal, not Roman. Where ever the Pope is there is the Catholic Church. He is the one that is infallible in teaching what Christ taught, along with the Bishops in union with him. As long as they ARE in union with him. I recommend reading the 3 volume books by William Jurgens, titled “The Faith of the Early Fathers.” God Bless, Memaw

**As I have already explained the origin of the modern Roman Catholic Church, I will simply say that if you subscribe to the Papal claims you are a Roman Catholic! This stems from the decision of the Council of Trent and is in the Creed of Trent. When the AC statement was issued to the TAC and others, the name was displayed on the public version for all to see.
You might be members of the Catholic Church, The Body of Christ, [Archbishop Laud always said so!] But you are still in a Particular Communion and no more!
**

 

[Memaw]

**As I have already explained the origin of the modern Roman Catholic Church, I will simply say that if you subscribe to the Papal claims you are a Roman Catholic! This stems from the decision of the Council of Trent and is in the Creed of Trent. When the AC statement was issued to the TAC and others, the name was displayed on the public version for all to see.
You might be members of the Catholic Church, The Body of Christ, [Archbishop Laud always said so!] But you are still in a Particular Communion and no more!

Seamusmohr,

As I already explained, the Catholic Church is where the POPE is and it IS GOD"S will that it be centered in Rome or it wouldn’t be there. You need to study the TRUE history of the Catholic Church. The word Roman is only to indicate the Catholic Church centered in Rome from the other Eastern Orthodox Churchs that broke away from the ONE, TRUE, Catholic and Apostolic CHURCH.
As for The Catholic Church being a “Particular Communion and no more.” well you will have to take that up with Jesus Christ, as HE is the ONE who established the Catholic Church and Promised HE would be with it till the end of the world and that the Gates of Hell would NEVER prevail against it. HE has kept HIS word for over 2,000 years and I don’t believe he will change it to suit your ideas.

I would be interested in your thoughts on the many thousands of Anglicans that have reunited to the Catholic Church and the many more that are in the process of doing so. God Bless, Memaw**

 

[paul_c]

That is not so! It was centered in the East, around the Roman Empire! It was because of the Monarchial, or political affiliations that Roman Church grew, the same reasons gave Constantinople its base . The Bishop of Rome was made Patriarch of the West, because he was Bishop of Old Rome, whilst Constantinople was made Patriarch of the East, because he was Bishop of New Rome! There you have it, a political title, nothing divine or apostolic about it. The Bishop of Rome was, in the early Church, a servant of the state and his Bishopric a Dept, of the same! All titles, to both Patriarchs were given by the Church, through the Ecumenical Councils and were of Honour and Place!

Of the timeline .little needs to be said in my opinion. The point at issue is that the the Church in Rome, in the early centuries was not ,‘The,’ Catholic Church. It was as one member nearly said, the Suburbicarian Church of Italy or Rome, with the City Bishop at the head. It existed from Rome down to the Toe and encompassed by three Islands! It was a Particular Church, or Communion within the Catholic Church.

Seamusmohr.
What is your source for this information? You have been mislead.

Lets try the real history. Have you read the History of the Church written by Eusebius in 310AD. Its available in most bookstores but also free online here: → newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm. It will give you a different perspective.

The see of Rome had Primacy from the time Peter established it. You can see this through the writings of the earliest recorded Church Fathers. Men like Clement of Rome in 95AD, Ignatius of Antioch in 110 AD, and Irenaeus in 180AD, all demonstrated in their writings that the Church in Rome had Primacy. You can read about them in Eusebius, which compiles all these writings up to his own time or you can read them separately. Just google them and you will find the actual documents.

The bishop of Rome was not a servant of the State. Far from it. Until the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, the Popes were hunted down by the state and martyred, one after another. By the time Constantine issued his edict ending Christian persecution, over 25% of the population of the empire were Catholic Christians, including his mother. He had not choice by to stop the persecutions. Constantine himself perferred Arianism to Catholicism but was overruled by the Pope and the Bishops in the Council of Nicea. You can also verify this from secular sources by Googling Council of Nicea or Arianism.

If you have contrary data, please share. Lets get to the truth…

 

[seamusmohr]

**

Seamusmohr,

As I already explained, the Catholic Church is where the POPE is and it IS GOD"S will that it be centered in Rome or it wouldn’t be there.

No! You havn’t explained , you told me certain things and normally I would accept someone’s reply, but in this case, dealing with the Body of Christ, as a Catholic I would have to insist on an explanation! I have read Translations of the Fathers , I’ve read Eusebius and I’ve read scripture, but I have never come across the news regarding the Church or Rome! In fact if I were challenged to produce, or single out, a city it would be Jerusalem!

Eastern Orthodox Churchs that broke away from the ONE, TRUE, Catholic and Apostolic CHURCH.

Thus making two One, True,Catholic and Apostolic Churches! At least according to the Eastern Othodox.

I would be interested in your thoughts on the many thousands of Anglicans that have reunited to the Catholic Church and the many more that are in the process of doing so. God Bless, Memaw

That Anglicanism is in a state, I do fully agree, but these people, TAC or FiF, have done very little to renew it! * They have ,to my mind abandoned the faith of some two thousand years, for what? As this Pope is said to have commented regarding their application in the 20th Cent, “They are poor Anglicans and want to become poor Roman Catholics”. This came from their spokesman now a bishop and he is quoting the then Cardinal Ratzinger. How true it is you’ll have to ask the latter, but it seems that not only is the pope generous with them, he’s very wise! They are a burden, as they are, to Anglican Catholicism and personally, I can’t wait till they do become Roman Catholics.*

 

[Memaw]

Memaw;6859972:

**

Seamusmohr,

No! You havn’t explained , you told me certain things and normally I would accept someone’s reply, but in this case, dealing with the Body of Christ, as a Catholic I would have to insist on an explanation! I have read Translations of the Fathers , I’ve read Eusebius and I’ve read scripture, but I have never come across the news regarding the Church or Rome! In fact if I were challenged to produce, or single out, a city it would be Jerusalem!

Seamusmohr,
Just goes to show, You are NOT God. HIS ways are NOT our ways. Memaw

Thus making two One, True,Catholic and Apostolic Churches! At least according to the Eastern Othodox.

Again;
the Orthodox are in Schism but they still have kept the Apostolic succession and will one day, maybe sooner than we know, return to the Church of Rome. Memaw

That Anglicanism is in a state, I do fully agree, but these people, TAC or FiF, have done very little to renew it! * They have ,to my mind abandoned the faith of some two thousand years, for what?

Again;
They abandon the faith of 1,500 some years when King Henry VIII took over as head of the Church of England. Memaw

As this Pope is said to have commented regarding their application in the 20th Cent, “They are poor Anglicans and want to become poor Roman Catholics”. This came from their spokesman now a bishop and he is quoting the then Cardinal Ratzinger. How true it is you’ll have to ask the latter, but it seems that not only is the pope generous with them, he’s very wise! They are a burden, as they are, to Anglican Catholicism and personally, I can’t wait till they do become Roman Catholics.***

Don’t know where your getting your information but that seems par for the course with you and your ramblings. We welcome the former Anglican’s back home!!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Cinette]

**As I have already explained the origin of the modern Roman Catholic Church, I will simply say that if you subscribe to the Papal claims you are a Roman Catholic! This stems from the decision of the Council of Trent and is in the Creed of Trent. When the AC statement was issued to the TAC and others, the name was displayed on the public version for all to see.
You might be members of the Catholic Church, The Body of Christ, [Archbishop Laud always said so!] But you are still in a Particular Communion and no more!

Seamusmohr,

As I already explained, the Catholic Church is where the POPE is and it IS GOD"S will that it be centered in Rome or it wouldn’t be there. You need to study the TRUE history of the Catholic Church. The word Roman is only to indicate the Catholic Church centered in Rome from the other Eastern Orthodox Churchs that broke away from the ONE, TRUE, Catholic and Apostolic CHURCH.
As for The Catholic Church being a “Particular Communion and no more.” well you will have to take that up with Jesus Christ, as HE is the ONE who established the Catholic Church and Promised HE would be with it till the end of the world and that the Gates of Hell would NEVER prevail against it. HE has kept HIS word for over 2,000 years and I don’t believe he will change it to suit your ideas.

I would be interested in your thoughts on the many thousands of Anglicans that have reunited to the Catholic Church and the many more that are in the process of doing so. God Bless, Memaw**

*The Catholic Church is the official name of our Church. It was the Anglicans who called us Roman and it stuck. I never say I am Roman Catholic because I am Catholic born in Africa (The Island of Mauritius)

God bless all
Cinette*

 

[Cinette]

Seamusmohr.
What is your source for this information? You have been mislead.

Lets try the real history. Have you read the History of the Church written by Eusebius in 310AD. Its available in most bookstores but also free online here: → newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm. It will give you a different perspective.

The see of Rome had Primacy from the time Peter established it. You can see this through the writings of the earliest recorded Church Fathers. Men like Clement of Rome in 95AD, Ignatius of Antioch in 110 AD, and Irenaeus in 180AD, all demonstrated in their writings that the Church in Rome had Primacy. You can read about them in Eusebius, which compiles all these writings up to his own time or you can read them separately. Just google them and you will find the actual documents.

The bishop of Rome was not a servant of the State. Far from it. Until the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, the Popes were hunted down by the state and martyred, one after another. By the time Constantine issued his edict ending Christian persecution, over 25% of the population of the empire were Catholic Christians, including his mother. He had not choice by to stop the persecutions. Constantine himself perferred Arianism to Catholicism but was overruled by the Pope and the Bishops in the Council of Nicea. You can also verify this from secular sources by Googling Council of Nicea or Arianism.

If you have contrary data, please share. Lets get to the truth…

*Constantine converted on his death bed.
*
Cinette

 

[Cinette]

Memaw;6859972:

**
Seamusmohr,

No! You havn’t explained , you told me certain things and normally I would accept someone’s reply, but in this case, dealing with the Body of Christ, as a Catholic I would have to insist on an explanation! I have read Translations of the Fathers , I’ve read Eusebius and I’ve read scripture, but I have never come across the news regarding the Church or Rome! In fact if I were challenged to produce, or single out, a city it would be Jerusalem!

Thus making two One, True,Catholic and Apostolic Churches! At least according to the Eastern Othodox.

That Anglicanism is in a state, I do fully agree, but these people, TAC or FiF, have done very little to renew it! * They have ,to my mind abandoned the faith of some two thousand years, for what? As this Pope is said to have commented regarding their application in the 20th Cent, “They are poor Anglicans and want to become poor Roman Catholics”. This came from their spokesman now a bishop and he is quoting the then Cardinal Ratzinger. How true it is you’ll have to ask the latter, but it seems that not only is the pope generous with them, he’s very wise! They are a burden, as they are, to Anglican Catholicism and personally, I can’t wait till they do become Roman Catholics.***

You a r e an angry person!

Cinette

 

[seamusmohr]

seamusmohr;6860104:

Memaw;6859972:

Don’t know where your getting your information but that seems par for the course with you and your ramblings. We welcome the former Anglican’s back home!!! God Bless, Memaw

Your reply above means quite clearly you have no answer! That’s alright!

Your rudeness? I forgive, to use your own phase,‘its par for the course,’. If one moves in muddy water, one expects to get splashed!

By the way the information comes from various sources both Orthodox and Anglican.

The Anglican Scholars are Denny ,Littledale, Barrow, Hickes and Laud!

 

[seamusmohr]

Memaw;6859972:

*The Catholic Church is the official name of our Church. It was the Anglicans who called us Roman and it stuck. I never say I am Roman Catholic because I am Catholic born in Africa (The Island of Mauritius)

God bless all
Cinette*

Dear Cinette,

You might be right about your name’s origin, but I can’t see it personally! I’ve already pointed out that at Trent, where your Church was founded, the name was adopted 1564 AD. You were catholics previous to that, but, Suburbicarian ones.Now??

As for being angry? Not really! I was in 1994 when the Canterbury Communion made priestesses, but not now. I realise that as an Anglican, I am a Catholic, because I am a member of the Body of Christ and a Child of God and I believe the revelation of Christ, but that doesn’t make me admire the Anglo-Catholics anymore than I did. Twice these people have let us down, [they provided the Bishops who sold us out ] for, safe seats, either in Rome or the C.of E.

Take Care,

Seamusmohr!

 

[Cinette]

Cinette;6860295:

Dear Cinette,

You might be right about your name’s origin, but I can’t see it personally! I’ve already pointed out that at Trent, where your Church was founded, the name was adopted 1564 AD. You were catholics previous to that, but, Suburbicarian ones.Now??

As for being angry? Not really! I was in 1994 when the Canterbury Communion made priestesses, but not now. I realise that as an Anglican, I am a Catholic, because I am a member of the Body of Christ and a Child of God and I believe the revelation of Christ, but that doesn’t make me admire the Anglo-Catholics anymore than I did. Twice these people have let us down, [they provided the Bishops who sold us out ] for, safe seats, either in Rome or the C.of E.

Take Care,

Seamusmohr!

*Your church began with Henry VIII when he got mad at the Catholic Church and the Pope for not letting him have his own way. Before that he was a wonderful defender of the faith and wrote a marvellous book about the Catholic Church. Once he broke away he confiscated monasteries and persecuted Catholics and all hell broke loose. I think it is wonderful that many Anglicans are coming home to the Catholic Church. Sorry you do not feel that way.

Cinette*